TECHNICAL SUMMARY
Predicting colloidal stability in beer
Beer stability can be judged by
the degree to which a beer
tastes and looks as good at the
end of its shelf life as it did
when it was first packaged.
Most customers “drink with
their eyes”. They are often more
willing to accept a glass of beer
which does not taste quite right,
over a glass of beer which is
hazy. Hence colloidal
stabilisation is often considered
a more important attribute than
flavour stability.
I n the first article of this series (January
2002) stability was related to both the
flavour and colloidal instability which can
occur in beer as a result of oxidation
reactions principally during and after
packaging. Through the use of modern
colloidal stabilisers it is possible to produce
beer which shows improved colloidal
stability. This article will cover the
measurement and prediction of colloidal
stability.
When it comes to assessing colloidal
stability of a beer for the duration of its shelf
life there are three principal methods:
• ABSOLUTE ACCURACY: - keeping the beer
at ambient and measuring haze at the end of
its stated shelf life (best before date – e.g. 12
months)
• RELIABLE INDICATOR – using some form
of accelerated ageing (forcing test) on the
packaged beer (e.g. 4 weeks at 37°C is
equivalent to 1 months storage at ambient)
and relating the date to absolute results.
• PREDICTIVE TEST – using a measurement
usually related to the proteins or polyphenol
content of the beer to predict the probable
rate of production of haze and hence the
shelf life.
Typically bright beer is packaged with an
EBC haze of less than 0.8 units. The critical
haze for stored beer is usually less than 2 or
3 EBC units for beer at 0°C.
Keeping beer to the end of its shelf life to
evaluate its colloidal stability is pointless
except as an assurance exercise but it is
essential to calibrate rapid prediction
methods.
Accelerated ageing tests
These tests are aimed at stressing the beer
usually by subjecting the beer to either hot or
cold conditions to produce “accelerated”
aging. Almost every brewing company has
Technical Summary 4
The fourth in this series of
technical summaries for
the Institute & Guild’s
AME candidates.
By Tim O’Rourke.
its preferred method. A few are listed below:
European Brewery Convention
(1963 method).
The beer is held at 60°C for 7 days then
cooled to 0°C for 24 hours and the haze
measured.
Harp method
The beer is stored for 4 weeks at 37°C
followed by 8 hours at 0°C and the haze
measured. In this method forced haze
development is equated to normal storage
time. One member of the consortium related
1 weeks forced aging to 1 month of storage
under normal conditions, while another
equated 4 weeks of forced storage to 6
months of storage under normal conditions.
The forcing tests have to be correlated to
normal storage conditions as shown in
Figure 1.
Fig 1: Correlation between forced haze and
absolute haze development.
Cycle tests – European Brewery
Convention (1975 method)
The beer is kept overnight at 0°C and the
haze read to establish the base line. The beer
is placed in a heated water bath at 60°C and
then kept overnight at 0°C and the haze
checked again. This shows the rate of haze
development and can be repeated over
number of cycles.
Although these methods are faster than
the absolute test, they still take a number of
days to several weeks to complete, by which
time the beer has been released and found
its way in trade. It is a reactive rather than a
proactive test.
Predictive tests
What every brewer would like is a test, which
can predict the colloidal stability and
The BREWER International • www.igb.org.uk • April 2002
therefore the expected shelf life of the beer.
There are a number of factors which
influence colloidal stability (see Technical
Summary, January 2002), however given
similar beer brands and brewery equipment,
the principal variables will come from the
protein and polyphenol content of the beer.
These are usually measured when predicting
colloidal stability.
Looking at the protein
(polypeptide) content
Chilling test
A sample of the beer is chilled below 0°C to
as low as -8°C without freezing (often alcohol
has to be added) and left for 8 hours and chill
haze measured. The lower the chill haze the
greater the stability. The chill haze is
principally the protein fraction.
Sensitive Protein –
Titration with tannic acid
Tannic acid is a “super” polyphenol which
readily forms insoluble complexes with
protein. A given amount of tannic acid is
titrated against a given volume of beer to
give a haze measurement which relates to its
stability
Ammonium Sulphate Precipitation (SASPL)
Saturated ammonium sulphate is titrated
against a sample of beer where it forms an
insoluble precipitate with larger molecular
weight polypeptides (m.w. 210,000). The
precipitate drops out and once all the
proteins have been removed, the haze starts
to increase giving an measurement of the
amount of high molecular polypeptides in
the beer.
Looking at the polyphenol content.
Titrating with PVP
This is a nephelometric titration of soluble
PVP (polyvinyl pyrollidone) solution. PVP has
a similar structure to a protein molecule and
readily forms an insoluble precipitate with
polyphenols, particularly medium size
molecular weight polyphenols often called
tannoids, which are know to be haze active.
When the PVP is titrated in beer a haze is
formed. This increases to a maximum and
then decreases by a dilution effect as PVP
addition continues. The peak value gives a
measure of the “tannoids” which can be
correlated with chill-stability.
High Performance Liquid Chromatography
Polyphenols can be adsorbed on Sephadex
LH 20 and can be identified using 4-
dimethylaminocinnamaldehyde as a
chromogen. The individual polyphenols can
then be measured directly.
These predictive tests can be used to
41
 TECHNICAL SUMMARY

Is this produce rapid results for beer prior to

packaging, but the results have to be
correlated with actual storage data.
PT-STABILITY-INDEX
P...PROTEINS T...POLYPHENOLS
PT-STABILITY-INDEX

someone
Protein-Reagent P40/ Polyphenol-Reagent
P...PROTEINS T...POLYPHENOLS T-125
For best results the data should be set up Protein-Reagent P40/ Polyphenol-Reagent T-125
per brand (product quality) and per brewery to HIGH VALUE = HIGH
HIGH VALUE COLLOIDAL
= HIGH STABILITY=
COLLOIDAL STABILITY=
LESS HAZE FORMING COMPOUNTS
reduce the amount of outside influences LESS HAZE FORMING COMPOUNTS

distorting the stabilisation results. 100

else’s C B

INCREASE OF PROTEIN STABILITY

As well as predicting the potential shelf life 90
HIGH
PROTEIN
STABILITY
of a beer, these methods are useful in 80
HIGH
PROTEIN
and
determining the optimum dosage rate of a POLYPHENOL
STABILITY
70

beer stabilisation treatment. See figure 2.

copy of 60

50

40
E

The
30

20 HIGH
A POLYPHENOL
STABILITY
10

Brewer 0

BEER A PT-
10

BEER A

unstable
Both,proteins
20 30

PT- INDEX 8 : 16
INDEX
40 50 60 70 80
INCREASE OF POLYPHENOL STABILITY

8 : 16and polyphenols are very

Both,proteins
and polyphenols are very
Predominat: Unstable proteins
90 100

unstable

you’re Figure 2: Determining the optimum dose rate for

a beer stabilisation treatment.
BEERPredominately
B PT-INDEX 95unstable

stable,
BEER B PT-INDEX
: 80

95 : 80
well balanced,extreme
proteins
Both,proteins and polyphenols are very

high stability
Both,proteins and polyphenols are very
BEERstable,
C PT-INDEX 90 : 25

reading?
Extreme high protein-stability
Automated measurements well balanced,extreme high stability
Low polyphenol stability
To help the brewer, some of the methods BEERBEER
C DPT-INDEX
PT-INDEX9030: 25
: 95
Extreme high polyphenol stability
described above have been automated. Extreme high protein-stability
Fair protein stability
Low polyphenol stability
BEER E PT-INDEX 35 : 45
Good stability for proteins and polyphenols
Tannometer BEER D PT-INDEX 30 : 95
This instrument measures the turbidity of a Extreme high polyphenol stability
re 3
Fair protein stability
liquid sample in the range of 0 to 300 EBC in
Make sure you stay units of 0.01 EBC. It works on transmitted light BEER E PT-INDEX 35 : 45
Good stability for proteins and polyphenols
at 510nm and the instrument can control the
on top of the sample temperature including cooling it down
to -8°C. The Tannometer can produce Figure 3: Predicting beer stability using
industry, scientific automated results for: PT standard.
• Tannoid content
and educational • Chill haze
news and analysis. • Sensitive Protein must not only look at the predicted stability of
• SASPL the beer in the brewery, but consider the
Order your own hazards the beer may be subjected to during
monthly copy of PT Standard storage and in the supply chain and take
Uses a series of specially developed reagents appropriate remedial action.
The Brewer International. to the measure the protein and polyphenol
content of a beer through titration and the
It couldn’t be easier. results can be simply displayed on a computer
allowing the brewer to see immediately the
relative stability of his beer and decide what
Simply call the further treatment – protein or polyphenol,
Subscription Department on could be used to achieve the required stability.
+44 (0) 20 7499 8144 See figure 3.

and start receiving your own Summary

regular copy of the There are a number of methods which can be
official magazine of the used to predict colloidal stability and hence
the shelf life of a beer. The principle reactions
Institute & Guild of Brewing. occur between the protein and polyphenol
fractions and hence the most consistent
results come by looking at the levels of both
fraction.
The
BREWERInternational The test and storage data are usually
collected under ideal (laboratory) conditions.
Packaged beer faces a much greater
extreme of conditions in the real world,
particularly those in the export trade, and it is
The Institute & Guild of Brewing export beers which are usually those
OFFICIAL MAGAZINE consumed near or at the end of their shelf life.
For those brewers anxious to deliver their
www.igb.org.uk beer to the consumer in prime quality they
● Further Reading
Tim O’Rourke: Beer Stabilisation Brewer
International – January 2002.
Tim O’ Rourke et al: from poster presented at Perth
Convention - Ferment June 1998 - p189.
Tim O’ Rourke: Back to Basics, Brewers Guardian
February 2000 - p29.
Jurgen Schneider: Opto-electronic regulations of
stabilisation inputs – Brewers Guardian July 2000.
M Moll: Colloidal Stability of Beer – Brewing Science
Vol 3 ed Pollock.
I. McMurrough I et al: Effect of PVPP dosage on the
flavanoid content of beer and consequences for beer
quality – Brew Digest 59 (10) 1984.

April 2002 • The BREWER International • www.igb.org.uk

42